Design and use of multi-linear drainage geocomposites for gas collection layers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pore pressures generated by gas underneath a geomembrane can affect its integrity and the entire lining system. It can create whales/hippos in a surface impoundment, significantly reduce normal stress on the lower interface and create a veneer instability on final landfill cover. The membrane is lifted by the pressure of the gas trapped beneath it. The solution to avoid such occurrences is to install a permeable material that collects and transmits the gas outside the lining system. It can be vented to the atmosphere in the case of impoundments or collected in a gas collection network for valorization in case of landfills, for example. A sand layer is certainly possible, but drainage geocomposites offer an efficient and economical alternative. Depending on the application, the drainage geocomposite is designed to act as a passive system (no mechanical vacuum applied) or active. This paper presents the use of multi-linear drainage geocomposite for gas collection and its hydraulic behavior to collect and evacuate the gas. A case study is also given with the use of geocomposite as venting layer under a lined pond.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".